Monday, June 29, 2009

As I mentioned before, political mercenary Jon Russell has announced for Congress against Baird.

Readers of my blog know that I'm not particularly fond of Brian Baird. He's taken votes that suck... he's voted "yes" on bills he hasn't read... he's had a major "back scratching" problem with earmarks... he's been far too cowardly in his handling of the Barnett/Paskenta/Mohergan/Cowlitz organized crime venture known as the megacasino... and he's lacked the courage of his convictions when it comes to his frequent articles in the Columbian about how he wants to change the rules and give everyone 3 days to read any bill before a vote is taken... only to conveniently forget about that every time issues inside that window come up.

That said...

I would volunteer my time, effort and money to re-elect Baird over Russell any time.

Russell spews pap like this:

“I represent a new generation of reformers who are fed up with career politicians in Congress because they suffer from a lack of vision and the will to do the right thing for the people,” he said in the release. “Restoring trust in government can only happen when we send people to Congress who recognize their place in history and serve a short time and then return to their careers outside of government.”

Sounds beautiful, doesn't it? You can almost hear the hearts and flowers and violin music playing as he says it.

And none of it is true.

What Russell represents is a new generation of political mercenaries where principle has no place at the table.

Oddly, in Russell's case and in the article below, he mentions something called "deputy campaign manager" for some guy in Indiana; his "former" involvement with Faith and Freedom, and a bogus shell company he set up with an impressive name: "Columbia Gorge Medical Center."

He left out his failed time at HROC, his disastrous spell as a Legislative Assistant in Olympia, and the fact that he ran the worst campaign in local elective history when he ran the Port of Vancouver's major effort to jack our taxes up through the roof.

Odd, isn't it? Russell lacked the "vision" to understand that he was profiting off an effort to nail us with a massive tax increase, yet he claims that HE has the "vision and the will to do the right thing for people?"

A Washougal city councilman is the latest Republican to announce his intentions to run against incumbent Democrat Brian Baird in the 2010 3rd Congressional District race.

Jon Russell, the 33-year-old co-owner of the Columbia Gorge Medical Center, announced his candidacy in an e-mailed press release Friday. Russell has a degree in political science and was the deputy campaign manager for U.S. Rep. John Hostettler of Indiana’s 8th Congressional District.

He’s the former director of the Faith and Freedom Foundation

“I represent a new generation of reformers who are fed up with career politicians in Congress because they suffer from a lack of vision and the will to do the right thing for the people,” he said in the release. “Restoring trust in government can only happen when we send people to Congress who recognize their place in history and serve a short time and then return to their careers outside of government.”

This leftist pap is just that. Further, Leavitt's "draft resolution" accomplishes ABSOLUTELY NOTHING except to provide this guy with an opportunity to politically grand stand.

"Hate" crimes are a sickening concept that somehow makes an assault based on skin color or gender or sexual proclivity or any of the many, many other segments we've been divided into, more worthy of greater punishment than just your average, run of the mill crime.

That is, if someone is shot because they are _____________ (fill in the blank) THAT crime is somehow more worthy of concern then someone getting shot, say, at random... or during a robbery.

And that, my friends, is pure, grade A, moronic bullshit. Fringe leftists love this kind of thing, but then, they are easily led tools anyway, or they wouldn't be fringe leftists.

There is no excuse for this kind of crap, and Leavitt ought to be at least as ashamed of himself over this as he is his rabid support for a replacement bridge that we don't need; loot rail that we neither need or want, and his continuing, ongoing failure to demand a vote for that entire project..

.Unfortunately, the American people have saddled this nation with an unabashed leftist liar.

We are already well aware that Mr. Obama lied during his campaign about every other sentence or so so who's managed to break many of his campaign promises, turn our foreign policy into a complete joke, and bury us in trillions of debt in the first few months of his painful tenure.

One of his fav scams is to force Congress to vote on bills that haven't even been read by those doing the voting.

Now, rest assured: had a GOP president pulled the several stunts this moron has nailed us with over their tenure, the Columbian and every other media organ in this country would be screaming like cut cats.

Yesterday, our erstwhile congressman for the past 11 years, backbencher Brian Baird, AGAIN voted for ANOTHER bill THAT HE HAD NOT READ.

This is PARTICULARLY hypocritical, given that ol' Brian has championed a time requirement between dropping a bill and then voting on it.

How can Brian Baird vote for this, or any other bill, after demanding 72 hours to review bills (Hey.... HERE'S a radical concept: MAYBE he can READ a bill BEFORE he votes for it?) and then vote for this crapfest in violation of his own rule?

For the past five years, Baird has been pushing for a change in House rules to require the waiting period — to no avail.

So, yesterday, when he had the opportunity to live up to his own standard... and perhaps persuade others to do the same.... what did he do?

He caved like a cheap, cardboard suit.

This goes beyond the major damage this bill will do to us and our country. The substance of this bill is as harmful as every other Obama initiative.

That is, it will waste hundreds of billions of dollars and we will have nothing to show for it but a mountain of debt.

Yes, all of that is aside from Mr. Baird's decision to sell us out... and sell out one of his own cherished principles because he, quite apparently, lacks the testicular capacity to stand up to the Belle of Botox or Rahm Emmanuel, who's skinny little ass can be booted out a door as fast as he breaks it down.

Now, these facts aren't secret. And so what does our local fishwrapper, bankrupt in both integrity and money, print?

Another in the series of their info-mercials for their boy, Brian Baird (D-Columbian).

Now, the byproduct of logging — the unmerchantable tree tops and limbs that are normally left on the forest floor or burned as slash — could be classified as a renewable source of fuel to generate electricity. The news bolsters a surging interest in biomass energy plants, including one proposal under consideration in north Clark County.

Turning wood scraps into energy got a major boost Thursday with a new provision added to the House version of a major federal energy bill. The bill narrowly passed Friday.

U.S. Rep. Brian Baird, D-Vancouver, said the provision should provide a new incentive for federal forest managers to thin overcrowded forest threatened by wildfire, disease or insect infestation.

"We have in the Gifford Pinchot thousands of acres of forest that are in need of treatment," he said in a telephone interview Thursday evening. "Much of that material would be used for renewable biomass (energy)."

Baird worked with Oregon Reps. Greg Walden, a Republican, and Kurt Schrader, a first-term Democrat from the Portland area, to define logging slash and wood debris from national forests as a renewable energy source. The provision will need to be adopted by the Senate version of the energy bill before it becomes law.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

As a general rule, government rarely SOLVES any problem. (Can you name one.... ONE problem government has solved? I can't.) What they do is reduce the noise on the problems we face to a bearable level. It is, in fact, the implementation of the "squeaky wheel" rule.

Government typically wants the unwashed masses (That's US, by the way.) to THINK government's doing something. That's why we cost ourselves tens of billions of wasted dollars by making all of the airport security workers federal employees, for example. It was a show, designed primarily to make us believe that our government, post 9/11, was actually DOING something.

In that regard... they were not. In the aftermath, it's easy to forget that none of the 9/11 hijackers violated the security laws then in effect. Federalizing airport security BEFORE 9/11 would have made absolutely NO difference in the 9/11 outcome... unless the rules had been changed as well.

It's important to remember that as we consider the latest plan to "save us" by removing older, more polluting, gas-guzzler type vehicles from the road.

Now, I haven't seen the final version of this nonsense, and many of the rules in question would blind an accountant in their complexity, purely an accidental outcome to be sure. So, I'll let Greg Gutfeld explain it to you in his own, inimitable, way:

Last week I was reading up on the "Cash for Clunkers" program which the Senate just approved, hoping to talk about it here. I gave up, however, because it didn't make any sense.

Then it dawned on me: It didn't have to! It's a government program. As long as it's paved with good intentions, it doesn't matter if the road goes nowhere.

Here's the deal: To get gas guzzlers off the roads, the government is offering vouchers worth up to $4,500 for your old car, to be used on a new car.

How does it work? (Breathe deeply.) You can trade in a car getting 18 miles per gallon for a car getting 22 mpg and get $3,500. But you'd get $4,500 if the new car is 10 mpg higher.

Now, if you own an old SUV, you could get $3,500 if your new wheels offer two more gallons per mile. If it's five more miles, then you get an extra grand.

You follow? Good, then find a gun and shoot me in the face.

Now, here's the fun part: None of this makes any sense if your old car is worth more than a voucher. Meaning this only works for crap worth under 3,500 bucks. And if that's the case, then the government pays and loses money on every junk heap.

Lastly, try to find someone with a piece of crud up on blocks in their front yard, who can suddenly afford a new car. You can count all of them on one foot, even if you're missing a toe.

So, in sum, welcome to the rebirth of big government. It'll drive you nuts just thinking about it.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

.A while back, No Choice Royce and his band of tax and spenders stupidly put together a head tax for businesses in Vancouver.

"Head taxes" are moronic, anti-business taxes that greedy governments impose when they're going broke... sort of a "kicking a dead horse" approach to filling up the increasingly larger ghost town that IS downtown Vancouver.

If one has the choice of setting up shop in an economic desolation zone like downtown only to get popped with an additional, $50 per employee tax... as if HAVING an employee, in and of itself, costs the city anything.... or setting up somewhere else where reality actually plays a role... what choice would YOU make?

The many, many empty store fronts in Vancouver speak for themselves.

It was moronic then, when the city strong-armed that massive waste of money into place by threatening (bluffing) to implement a city B&O tax that business stupidly went along with, and it's stupid now, in the midst of this huge economic downturn.

Well, the light has went on in Seattle, and they're smart enough to see this turd in the punch bowl for what it is.

Seattle is getting rid of this garbage fee on business. How is it that Seattle has figured it out... but the morons in Vancouver City Hall take no action to kill THEIR version of this idiocy?

Originally published June 23, 2009 at 11:35 AM Page modified June 23, 2009 at 11:53 AM

The Seattle City Council and Mayor Greg Nickels plan to repeal an unpopular business tax they say discourages hiring.

The mayor proposed the annual "head tax" of $25 for every full-time employee in 2006. It raises about $4.7 million a year, revenue used for transportation projects, such as street and sidewalk maintenance.

In this economy, the mayor said in a press release, "we want to do everything possible to create jobs and help businesses grow."

Council members Tim Burgess and Richard Conlin are leading the effort on the council to repeal the tax. Even if $25 a year isn't enough to stop a business from hiring a new employee, it's complicated for businesses to calculate the tax, and it can be used by surrounding cities to make Seattle look less-than-business friendly, Burgess said.

The tax includes exemptions for workers who commute by bus, carpool, bicycle or walking.

Monday, June 22, 2009

Freedom of the press... freedom of THEIR opinions... (even to the point of lies) and, of course, freedom to censor those they disagree with.

As mentioned below, Brancaccio's request for people to "start talkin!" because he's"listening." is limited only to those he wants to hear from. Those he doesn't want to hear? Well, he squelches their voice to silence.

I've noticed an intrepid poster over there, one of many daring to stand up to the fringe-left propaganda of our local fish wrapper. And that person's posts were almost completely obliterated this morning, regardless of content.

It's kind of like a local version of BDS. Hatred for dissenting viewpoints can be a terrible thing.

This paper expresses that hatred in a variety of ways. Fringe leftist nut job John Laird, editorial page editor and a propagandist in ways that would make Minister Goebbels blush is a case in point.

And now, Brancaccio has again joined the cast of those who would silence opposition to his paper's positions and agenda.

Gee. I bet he's proud of himself this morning. His actions and those of the Iranian secret police have a lot in common..

Thanks to the Hot Air Blog: Neda identified? Update: New details

Word on the street via one Iranian tweeter is that her name was Neda Agha Soltan. That’s also the name circulating on a few websites and now being attributed to her in a hastily arranged Wikipedia bio. The rumor — and it’s all rumor until some newspaper tracks down her family — is that she was 27 years old and a philosophy student. I hope to god this isn’t really her photo because the thought of her being so beautiful and dignified makes the murder somehow that much more obscene.

Two clips below. The second you’ve already seen; the first is a new one circulating today, shot sometime before the moment of truth. The blue shirt on the gray-haired man in the foreground should look familiar. That’s almost certainly her standing to his left, watching the protest, bothering no one. Read this Time piece on Neda by Iran expert Robin Wright afterwards, as it touches on the huge significance of martyrdom not only in Shiite theology but in Iran’s political tradition. If there’s any justice, there’ll be videos like this of Khamenei and Ahmadinejad someday soon.

Update: A Farsi speaker tells HuffPo that this blogger is claiming that Neda was at the protest with her professor and several other students and that the fatal shot was fired by a Basij driving by on a motorcycle. No rhyme or reason; I wonder if he even aimed. The burial, reportedly, was today — and her memorial service was ordered canceled by the regime.

.It's fairly clear that Lou Brancaccio, the editor of the Columbian, wants us to THINK the paper is flexible and responsive.

He babbled on about their Reader's Advisory Council, a collection of bobble-headed, Amen Choir types that, to hear him tell it, seem to think, among other lies, that "Members felt our bridge coverage continues to be good. "

That any group could possibly believe that substituting opinion for news; lies for genuine polls, and failing to demand a vote for the entirety of this debacle simply confirms how utterly worthless this group is.

They are, in fact, a reflection of a student government, in, say, middle school. They have no real power; they go through the motions but rarely make any real change, and ultimately, they pretty much wind up becoming a reflection of the school administration.

Whoever these people are, their apparent discussions about paint jobs on this Titanic while they continue to support the nonsensical and indefensible positions of this paper... positions that have shoved them towards bankruptcy, serve to confirm how much they serve the role of window dressing... and how little impact or effect they could have, even if they wanted to have any impact, because it's clear that as change agents, they fail.

If this group has not roundly condemned John Laird's divisive and damaging columns; if this group has not repeatedly demanded fairness and accuracy in the Columbian's coverage of the I-5 Bridge/Loot Rail propaganda or that this paper demand a vote on the entirety of that debacle, then they are worthless; not representative of this community and serve no real purpose.

When the Columbian ran those fake polls suggesting that everything is hunky dory about loot rail, did they protest, or did they just sit there and nod like idiots?

The failure of this paper to implement any substantive changes... to go out and scam a B&O tax break when the rest of small business in this state is suffering FAR worse than they are... the failure to actually LISTEN and CHANGE shows that, essentially, you've put together a group that amounts to just another Amen Chorus... or that the paper ignores their positions, much like they ignore most of the positions stated under Brancaccio's columns.

You see, where this idea makes any money is where it's resulted in any changes. And as carefully as I read Brancaccio's column, I failed to note a single instance where this group or any other source of criticism has EVER made any real impact or difference to this paper. Brancaccio says they "WILL" see changes, but that infers that this group, which has been here for years, HASN'T YET MADE ANY DIFFERENCE.

Having the group? Swell. Ignoring them or any other opposition to what you're doing, particularly while you're in the midst of Chapter 11?

Moronic idiocy.

Kinda reminds me of the Supreme Soviet or the former Iraqi Congress under Saddam.

A lot of voting. But not a lot of opposing.

And then, as it turns out, if Lou doesn't "like" you, he censors your ability to comment on his columns.

The irony of his latest scam is the end of his latest bogosity:

If someone wants to comment, let them have their say. I try to keep my pie hole shut as much as I can.

I learn more when I'm listening than when I'm talking.

So start talkin'! I'm listening.

The absurdity of this is that as I write this, a grand total of FOUR posters have been allowed to comment.

FOUR. (There are 5 posters, but Lou is two.) Lou will probably point to the few comments as some sort of sign that everyone believes this paper is hunky dorry, and all's well. Other columns Lou have written have resulted in 50, 60 or even more posters telling him how idiotic his positions are.

This column, magically... mysteriously.... not one.

Now, for several months (since the website was redone) many posters have commented on the incompetence of the system because posting there is a hit or miss business.

There have been a number of complaints; posters post, but the post doesn't show up; posters post and the post disappears without comment (censored) and the like.

Brancaccio is fully aware of the idiocy of this system, but merely says his webmaster, Jeff Bunch, should be emailed about this stuff.

That's odd, but yet another sign of Brancaccio's incompetence: Bunch should be called in. He should be told to fix the problem, a problem that has gone on for 9 months now; and if HE can't fix it, Brancaccio should get someone who can.

The incompetent aspect of this is very telling: If this moron won't even fix an obvious SYSTEM problem with his web page, then how is it that anyone could possibly expect him to make any of the many, massive, substantive changes needed to make this paper even remotely competitive and fiscally viable?

Or, we have the second, likely, possibility: censorship.

When Brancaccio says "So start talkin'! I'm listening," what he REALLY means is "If you AGREE with me, I want to hear it. If you DON'T agree with me, then don't bother."

Either way, the RAC is a joke, a farce, and another in the series of offenses to this community.

We typically give the summer off to our Readers Advisory Council. Of course, they have lives other than just hanging out on our council. But we do hope they have fun, as well.

Our council helps to guide us. In essence, they are another set of eyes on what we do. So throughout the year, we meet every other month to have them tell us how they think we're doing.

We don't turn down positive feedback from them, but we let them know that's not what we're looking for. We're looking for what we can do better so we can get better.

The group is made up of community members, and it's a pretty diverse group. They come from many walks of life.

The only requirement is that they read The Columbian and/or regularly look at our Web site.

We often take their advice, and they'll see changes in The Columbian. Still, a few members feel their views aren't executed. And that's because we can't execute every idea given to us. But certainly, we listen.

We listen to others as well, including those who comment on our Web site. I get quite the group, for example, that comments on this column online.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

.Erstwhile, increasingly perennial candidate Mike Heywood swung by to mention his web site for his campaign:

I've put a lot about my positions on my web site, Mikeforvancouver.com. Given the tone and tenor of your posts, I doubt you will find much there to admire or agree with.Mike Heywood

(Anonymous) 6/16/2009

He's right about that. But, I do admire the fact that he came here to let me know about his website.

The problem is that now I have to blow more holes in his positions than a wheel of Swiss cheese.

I've written about Mr. Heywood in the past; those so inclined can search this blog by using the "search" function in the upper left corner.

I'm struck by this phrase on his home page:

"I do not, however, take marching orders from The Columbian, and I am not in the pocket of downtown interests."

But a careful review of Mike's positions fail to show where he has any different position from either.

If he's not in their pocket... then how come he sounds precisely like they do?

Does he:

Support the massive and unconscionable waste of an unneeded and unwanted I-5 Bridge replacement that has already wasted tens of millions of dollars in planning?

Support the massive and unconscionable waste of an unneeded and unwanted loot rail system?

Support nailing the people with a massive toll every day as they commute to work?

Oppose giving the people of this county a vote?

Support massive annexations so that Vancouver may achieve the utterly worthless position of the second largest city in the state... as if that mattered?

Support the many tax and fee increases the City has rammed down the people's throats?

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes and yes.

Now, tell me... how does that differ from either the downtown mafia or the Columbian?

Will he continue the battle against the Barnett Mafia ramming a massive casino down our throats? He seems to have avoided a position on that.

So, what we have is an avowed leftist (Much like he was when he was running the Columbian's editiorial page... and much like John Laird is now) who wants to continue fighting for every item the downtown mafia and the Columbian want, but somehow Mike is not taking his "... marching orders from The Columbian, and I am not in the pocket of downtown interests."

It is for the reader to decide if the exact similarity between the Downtown Mafia/Columbian positions and those of Mr. Heywood are sheer coincidence.

Oddly, I seem to remember a relatively recent election where the empty suit that we elected never missed the opportunity to compare John McCain with George Bush.

Now, Mike should be aware of that. After all, he seems to exhibit a high level of pride for his support of that anti-American, anti-business, incompetent empty-suited racist bigot to the presidency. It's absolutely no reason to vote for Mike, of course, but he is apparently unaware of that.

That said, how come ol' Mike rabidly supported a candidate who never hesitated to compatre McCain with Bush; while we cannot compare Mike with the downtown interests who own him? Odd, that.

In the end, Mike is wrong in his positions, including the position that would cost every commuter over the criminally stupid I-5 Bridge/Loot Rail debacle over $1200 a year; a fee that, like 99% of the resty of the Bridge Humpers, HE will not have to pay.

And that just goes to illustrate how easy it is for Mr. Heywood to advocate the spending of other people's money, precisely the attitude we DON'T need in this or any other economy.

Mike is endorsed by every living democrat and union, particularly the union scum that will benefit from the massive waste of building an unneeded replacement bridge with loot rail.

Big whoop.

He offers no reason, compelling or otherwise, to get rid of Jeannie Stewart. So, if voting in yet another fringe leftist member of the Amen choir, determined to do the bidding of the Downtown Mafia and the newspaper is what you think needs to happen, then by all means, vote for Mike..

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

.Jon Russell, best known for getting paid several thousand dollars to ram the largest property tax increase (Via the Port of Vancouver Tax Increase) in this county's history down our collective throats has been telling people he's gonna run for Congress.

From a rather fascinating email that made the rounds late in 07:

Jon is an interesting guy with a short, but big, political background.

Jon came on the scene back in 2004 as HROC’S SW Washington Rep. Mr. Russell was not quite successful. In the end, he was relegated to liaison duties for the Curtis Campaign, and he managed to lose Paul Harris’s race in the primary and Roy Rhine’s race in the general.

But his most noteworthy accomplishment was the exceptional job he did running the Port of Vancouver’s abysmal IDD Levy campaign.

From the “Citizens for a Strong Economy Pac” (The Port’s Levy PAC) in the recent election debacle.

Jon RussellRussell, 31, was appointed to serve on council in September 2006, after Mary Bosley resigned for health reasons.He owns Northern Concepts, LLC, in Washougal.

The address?

1431 D St. Washougal, WA. 98671

NW Concepts?

That’s reported under a non-existent address in Vancouver, purely an oversight, I’m sure.

1431 D St. VANCOUVER, WA 98671

It’s probably safe to say that it isn’t “Vancouver,” it’s Washougal.

So, what we have here is a history of something less than stellar campaigning… and something less then fiscal conservatism. In fact, the IDD Levy, had it been successful, would have cost the taxpayers of the Port District millions.

So, we have a candidate here that, by his own actions, puts the TAX in TAX AND SPENDER._________________________________________________

In short, he's a political mercenary, and individual motivated by money who will sell out principle when the price is right.

Monday, June 15, 2009

Bridge supporters (Not to be confused with athletic supporters, although they serve the same function) use this carbuncle of a newspaper as an out and out propaganda sheet where no lie is too bald-faced, no exaggeration too far out of the realm of reality for the scum writing in this rag.

Yesterday's vomitous from John Laird, fringe leftest chiefly known for using his bully pulpit to attack anyone to the right of Lenin, was all about the unheard of straw man of comparing the I-5 Bridge Waste/Loot Rail project with the replaced bridge in Minneapolis.

When it comes to the I-5 Bridge Waste/Loot Rail project, the ONLY person I've ever heard bring that situation up has been John Laird. The Columbian brought it up when it happened in a moronic and now aborted attempt to get people to equate the I-5 Bridge with the collapsed Minneapolis bridge... garbage I anticipated in advance.

Unintentionally, to be sure. But the myths of the bridge supporters are almost too numerous to count, but among the myths furthered by Laird and his ilk include the idea that our community will benefit in ANY way. They insist on telling us that this massive waste of money will have either 12 lanes or 10, when in fact, it will only have 6 through lanes, precisely like the bridge we have now. They insist on a nonsensical figure for construction when we'll be lucky to get all of this done for twice that much. They have done practically nothing on the massive, decades-long financial impacts of sucking tens of millions of dollars out of our local economy to pay for this transportation sewer that will suck up transportation dollars badly needed elsewhere, particularly for a 3rd and 4th bridge.

Yesterday's despicable effort by Laird is all-too-typical of this newspaper's propagandists.

If this newspaper were remotely concerned about "myths," Laird and this paper would never report another word about this bridge, since most of what they write is grossly exaggerated or a downright lie. Of course, what "needs" to happen here is nothing.

Secondary to that, what "needs" to happen here is a vote of the people. I have never mentioned the Minneapolis bridge as a reason, a vision, or an excuse to oppose this unnecessary, massive and unconscionable waste of billions of dollars much better spent elsewhere. Nor has anyone else I've discussed this with. NOTHING needs to happen here.

When the chief bureaucratic bridge shill, Don Wagner, comes out and says: "he has no doubts the existing crossings are safe, so much so that he drives and cycles across the spans without hesitation. "If we don't have an earthquake of any magnitude, those two bridges are going to stay there until something hits them," he said. “The existing spans, opened in 1917 and 1958, are structurally sound.” What he's REALLY saying is there is no need for this despicable waste of money... and that's the truth regardless of what happened in Minneapolis. But then, truth and John Laird rarely take up residence in the same space... at the same time.

It is this despicable brand of one sided, biased garbage journalism that is helping to cause this rag, which does a disservice to this community with each and every edition, that certainly provides cause for tens of thousands of us to avoid buying this crap like the plague.

Additionally, I'm told, that selective commenter's have been banned from refuting Laird's garbage in the comment section under his columns on line. That speaks to the cowardice of both his positions, and those of this rank imitation of a newspaper.

And that's a shame. But when your newspaper is built on lies, particularly in an economy like this one, who could possibly want to buy it?

So. Am I supposed to be all warm and fuzzy inside that *I* (and millions of others) know more than the Vice-Moron? Is the Vice-Moron's pronouncement supposed to be some sort of confidence builder?

So blinded by political bias that common sense has no place at the table?

Many said all along that this WILL NOT WORK. That you and the rest of the Administration WOULD NOT LISTEN does NOT mean that "everyone guessed wrong." What it means is that you lot were too damned stupid to see it in your desire to pay off your buddies.

But now, as another famous fringe-leftist once said, THOSE chickens are COMING HOME TO ROOST.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Part of the reason I do this is to verbalize my frustrations. Face it, there's a great deal at every level of government to be frustrated at.

The problem is the burnout factor, and the inevitable conclusion that no matter what we say or do, things are rarely impacted by our words.

Corruption truly does run rampant in government. We are, according to someone far wiser that I, SUPPOSED to be a government by, for and of the people.

Where do we see that?

Locally, governments in this county are ramming a bridge and light rail down our throats that will waste billions and change nothing... except to bury our local economy in debt to the benefit of the unions and to stoke the egos of those who seem to believe themselves smarter than those they would govern.

They don't want to ask us because they know what we would say... and they simply don't want to hear it.

Imagine. A government that forgets the basis for their political power... a government that simply does not want out opinion.

At the city level, corrupt members of the La Center city government are doing everything they can to allow the slimeballs running the Casino scam to build that thing; a position violently opposed to common sense and the interests of this community.

Local newspapers and politicians SUPPORTING the scummy practice of gerrymandering lines to force us to pay THEIR taxes without even having the guts to ask us. So, we're denied the right to have a say, but not the right to PAY their fricking taxes.

Local government is OK with that. Few stand up to that corruption that stains our democracy.

At the federal level, we have members of Congress who remain silent in the face of this corruption, or in the alternative, actually engage in the corrupt practices themselves. Local media, well aware of this situation, rarely holds them accountable and ALWAYS endorses and otherwise scams us into supporting their re-election.

Our Federal reps voted for a trillion dollars in debt without even reading the bill.

Let me repeat that: Our Federal reps voted for a trillion dollars in debt without even reading the bill.

Did local media demand answers? Was ANY effort made to hold these people accountable for their despicable acts?

The confirmed idiocy of the president, repeatedly documented since he took office. A level of buffoonery never seen in Washington, D.C., and a 60% plus approval rating, as if the people are still hypnotized by this empty-suited used car salesman.

I've written about day after day, but nothing changes. No one rises up. No one demands change.

The alarm becomes background noise. And it kills the motivation to protest, to ask, to demand. Government does not care because government does not have to care.

And here we are; trillions of dollars in debt that future generations will not be able to repay. A foreign policy where the label "joke" is a gross understatement. Campaign lies, the order of the day.

And who pays attention? Who does anything about it? If we do not demand action... what difference does this make?

Follow by Email

Subscribe To

Words of Wisdom

"No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth."

Plato

"This country has shed more blood for the freedom of other people than all the other nations in the history of the world combined, and I'm tired of people feeling like they've got to apologize for America."

Sen. Fred Thompson (R-TN)

“In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

George Orwell, the author of 1984

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."

Dr. Martin Luther King

"Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom."

Alexis de Tocqueville

"A return to first principles in a republic is sometimes caused by the simple virtues of one man. His good example has such an influence that the good men strive to imitate him, and the wicked are ashamed to lead a life so contrary to his example."Niccolo Machiavelli

“Cowardice asks the question, 'Is it safe?' Expediency asks the question, 'Is it politic?' But conscience asks the question, 'Is it right?' And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but because conscience tells one it is right.”

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Washington State Constitution, Declaration of Rights

"All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights." - Article 1, Section 1

"The right of petition and of the people peaceably to assemble for the common good shall never be abridged." - Article 1, Section 4

"The first power reserved by the people is the initiative." - Article 2, Section 1(a)